Apparatus for determining weldability



5-Sf1eets-Sheet 1 J. HEUSCHKEL APPARATUS FOR DETERMENING WELDABILITY Filed June -9, 1945 I III v 7 x .0

Ila 2 I HHIH H. 0 u

w: a m P r lla 9 7 II A 5 5 I N 1| lllllllll-lmulllll Illl I l Aug. 20,- 1946.

0, 1946 J. HEUSCHKEL 2,406,076

APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING WELDABILITY File d June 9 1943 5 Sheets-Sheet 2 -25 1? Fig.5. 2.; 1 I 2'. 1g km F27 J. HEUSCHKEL 2,406,076

APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING WELDABILITY Filed June 9, 1945 5 Sheets-Sheet 3 lfirg. 6'. 7.

Lacafion aFfearJ EXAMPLE; 7, l5, /6a/70/7 A1181 20,v 1946- J. HEUSCHKEL 2,406,075

APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING WELDABILITY I Filed June 9, 1945 5 Sheets-Sheet 5 (/04 my f/EUSCH/(EL,

' b/sAwr/v i v S7 fMMPLL-S/O, Hand/2 WEAK MA TER/ALS EXAMPLES 7, 8 e049 Patented Aug. 20, 1946 APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING WELDABILITY Julius Heuschkel, Mount Lebanon, Pa., assignor to Carnegie-Illinois Steel Corporation, a corporation of New Jersey Application June 9, 1943, Serial No. 490,212

The present invention provides certain improvements in apparatus for determining the weldability of steels, the invention enabling a more accurate determination .of this property than has been possible by procedures heretofore customarily employed and considered to be standard. Generally speaking, the present invention provides a low speed energy absorption operation, and particularly with-the necessary apparatus, by means of which it is possible to compare the probable service performance of metals when fusion-welded. The development and selection of a method or weldability test for determinin the relative suitability of various materials for use in any particular welded application has been widely discussed but not one universally accepted test has been or is now being used by either the welding or manufacturing industries.

The present invention utilizes the so-called T- bend test which was developed by the United States Navy Department. I i

In this T-bend test a T-sh'aped specimen is formed by welding together two elements of standardized cross-section. The test specimen is placed in position with respect to a, centrally disposed mandrel which is attached to the platen of a compression type test machine. of the T is held firmly in the slOt of a vertically movable guide. The welded surface of the T- cross bar is placed horizontally in contact with a pair of rollers, one on each side of the vertical stem. A load is applied to the specimen opposite from the welded side by movement of the platen. Movement of the T-cross bar is resisted by the rollers, resulting in the cross bar being deflected at an angle which is related to the value of the load applied. The stress developed by the load strains the specimen severely in the heataifected zone of the welded joint and the angular deflection which the joint can sustain is commonly used as an indication of the weldabiilty of the base material.

As originally devised and generally used, the above described T-bend test has one serious weakness: namely, the inability to define logically just what constitutes acceptable performance. Further, except for special applications, it has been difiicult to explain why any particular arbitrary'standard of load resisted, or deformation sustained, or type of fracture, must be met. If such a welded 'bend specimen breaks sharply,

there is no question about the time of failure;

since the angle of failure can be readily determined. If, however, progressive tearing back along the bend or into the base metal takesplace, it is dilficult to determine at What angle the tearing starts and to state whether that angle or the ultimate angle of bend should be considered as the angle of failure. Quantitative answers based upon angle of bend alone therefore are The stem 2 Claims. (01. 73-89) judged the performance the final deformation 2 questionable. difliculty in their bend testing, but rather than attempting to obtain a quantitative answer in terms of angle of bend, they have established minimum ultimate angles of bend either at maximum' load or at the'occurrence cf'failure and of the specimen by the character of the fractures. Just what use, if any, should be made of the maximum load resulting from the test has been a matter of disagreement.

It can be seen from the foregoing that in the T-bend test as generally used, the performance of the welded joint could be judged by five criteria: (1) the maximum load applied; (2) the deformation at which maximum load occurred; (3) the deformation at the start of failure; (4) at complete failure; and (5) by the type of fracture. Of these criteria, all but the first have been used at different times in judging the merit of a steel; the value of the maximum load has merely been recorded. The significance of both the deflection at the occurrence of the fracture and the type of fracture are often a matter for differences of opinion. Since, the fivefactors are often independent variables,

no single acceptable basis has existed for distinguishing between stron brittle steels and weak ductile steels, or for comparing strong ductile steels with weak brittle ones, or for readily comparing any of the many intermediate types.

For correcting these defliciencies, while retaining the use of the fundamentally sound features of the T-bend test, there has been developed the present invention which involves a method of determining the energy of deformation of welded joints, which method can be used as a quantitative measure of weldability of the base metah.

The measurement of energy enables the relative suitability of materials forus in various applications to be determined and rated if desired.

The invention will be understood more readily from a consideration of the accompanying draw-1 ings, wherein: a

Fig. 1 represents a front elevation'of an assembled equipment for making the energy determination in accordance with the tion;

Fig. 2 is an enlarged detailed front elevation of the portion of the mechanism of Fig. 1 which directly'receives the test specimen and enables the energy determinations of the present invention to be made;

Fig. 3 is 'a side elevation of the apparatus of Fig.2;

Fig. 4 is a sectional elevation through .the device of Fig. 2, at a reduced scale, the view being taken on the section line IV-IV of Fig. 2;

Fig. 5 is a sectional elevation taken at right angles to Fig. 4, at a reduced scale, the view Some users have recognized this present invenbeing taken along the line ,ing in the direction of the arrows;

,showing the bend imparted to the specimen;

3 Fig. 7 is an energy diagram similar to Fig."6,-- but obtained wherea partial tear cccurredin the" selected value, for example, 100 pounds, 200 @specimen during bending, the specimen being also indicated in'th view; L. Q 7

Fig. 8 is an energy diagram of the type shown l() v in Figs. 6 and 7, but showing a complete tearing failure, the view showing also an actual weld specimen exhibiting such failure;

V- V of Fig.3, look- Fig. 6 is. an energy diagram where no failure or break in the specimen occurred, the Vii-1W Fig. 9' shows three energy curves, resulting from a sharp fracture, the view showing also the types ofbreaks in actual welded specimens correv sponding to the respective curves; .f i

, Fig. 10 showsv two sets of superposed energy 1 diagrams showing actual examples of the behavior of different steels from the'standpoint of energy absorption up to points of failure, the

said steels resisting maxi-mum loads andlhav ing the same deflection at maximum loads} Fig. 11 shows superposed energy diagrams ob'- ftained from examinationof fourspecime'ns of steel, showing the relation between the angle of bend at the start of failure and relative ratingbend upon energy absorption;

Fig. 12 also shows superposed energydiagrams showing that certain materials may have equal 1 capacities to absorb energy while. having widely difierent abilities to resist loads and deflection;

Fig. 13 is a graph showing a. deflection a'ngle curve for 'a given thickness and span 'ofa given test-piece; 7 r

Fig. 14'is a diagrammatic view showing the block which is employed in the apparatus of Fig.

I l, the view indicating different sizes of rollers ing predetermined conditions of-bendingforsee lected specimens.

Referring more particularly to. the drawings,

the apparatus for making the determinations in j accordance with the present 'invention'is. indi-' 1 cated at A, which is mounted between the top 3 and bottom platens B andC of the testing machine D, which is of any standard type, there 1 being relative movement between the platens, 1 the bottom platen C being the movable'platen in the illustrated embodiment of the machine, it 1 being the head of a hydraulic piston operating f in cylinder E, the cylinder being connected hydraulically to pressure indicating gages F,which gages measure the amount of force applied to" the specimen during deformation thereof; j; l

, The apparatus proper for making thedeterwhich may'be used interchangeably"foriobtain on -the. accuracy desired.

T shaped crosshead is provided with 'a slot 33 of load as measured by the gages F, As the load is applied, points aremarked manually on the chart blanks 3! at these. selected points whenever the gages F indicate changes of load corresponding to the said equal increments of load. The increments of load may be of any pounds, 500 pounds, or 1000 pounds, depending The stem of the whichreceives the stem 35 of the welded together T specimen, which rests on the mandrel 2| with its crossbar 31 beneath the spaced deforming rollers-39, 4|, which are mounted in suitable blocks 43, 45, which are removably se-' cured'in the frame-members H. The rollers may also be removable from their block for replacement by other rollers of selected size and shape to make; the conditions of bending prede'ter minately conformable to any given type of specimen being examined. 7

.In the operation'of the'foregoing equipment, the scale 29, which is calibrated in poundsload is mounted on the crosshead l9 and extends horizontally across the pad of chart blanks 3! which is mounted suitably'on the upper frame l1 7 there are two provided on the machine for operating the platen until the stem 35 ofythe T-spec- Y imen entersthe centering slot 33in the crosshead I9. This slot 33' is so designed that the upper part of the stem bears against the base of the slot before thedeforming rollers 39 and 4| contact the specimen; The specimen thereby becomes both centered and guided automatically.

If any other type of joint is used, the specimen must be centered properly. The load is applied always exactly on the center line of the joint. This condition is assured since the mandrel 21 has a, thickness which will just permit its entry between the main members of the frame ll.

To' produce the bending of the specimen, hydr'aulic pressure is applied beneath the platen C. As the bending load is applied, the horizontal member 3'! is deflected about the mandrel 2!, as is shown in Fig. 14. load, for example as the increments of the load increase 100 lbs., as indicated by the dials F, the machine operator announces the load borne by the specimen and the apparatus A, and the operator of this apparatus moves a pencil point by hand along the horizontal scale 29 to a value in pounds to correspond to the announced load on the specimen.v The determination is stopped at failure of the specimen, or when the desired deflection has been reached. The marks on the pad 3! when connected by a continuous curve form a semi-automatic energy diagram of the deflection of the "The'crosshead I9 is T-shaped, and the has; i

l zontal member carries a scale 29, the sca1e '29' extending across a pad of chart-blanks arsenably mounted'o'n the upperjpart of theframe l1. i

' The scalelfil'is calibrated in any suitable units l of length. J Equal unitsof length along the scale '29 are selected to correspond to equalincrements :specimen. The area under the curve is measured I loads often are released duringv sudden failures,

any delicate instruments would be short lived.

The frame I! is lowered by lowering the At suitable increments of The apparatus also may be used in making low temperature tests, the specimens and mandrel being immersed in a refrigerating fluid at all times.

During the time required for determination, the platen C has lifted th mandrel and crosshead from starting position indicated in full lines in Fig. 2 to the top position indicated by broken lines this indicating the amount of the deflection of the such a diagram, the following can be ascertained:

(a) Magnitude of load at any deflection. (b) Deflection at any load. Point at which non-elastic deflection begins.

(d) Point at which maximum load occurs.

(6) Point of occurrence of start of failure, if any, and

(f) Character of failure, that is, whether it is specimen. 10 graduaLabrupt, or if no failure occurred.

For all diagrams of unbroken specimens shown These points are clearly illustrated in Figs. 6 in the drawings (Figs. 6 to 12 inclusive) the de to 11, inclusive. fiective limit happens to be 2.89 inches which is The maximum load borne by the specimen is the limit originally established by one user of the shown by the maximum load ordinate and the T bend test for /2 inch plate. This deflection corl5 angle at which the maximum load occurred and responds to a total angle of bend of 129 with the that at the start of failure can be obtained from proportions of span used. Specimens may be the deflection at the point in question and the pushed completely through the bending rollers experimentally developed angle-deflection curves if desired. for the particular span and thickness used. An

If no failure of any kind occurs, an energy diaexample of this is shown in Fig. 13. gram as shown in Example 1, Fig. 6, is obtained. Quantitative energy values for weldability ob- This example is typical of the performance of the tained from the diagrams may be used in several best welding materials, although the load during ways. The actual inch-pounds of energy absorbed deformation may be either greater or less than may be used as specification requirements or the shown in Example 1. If no failure occurs, the '1 ratios of the absorbed energy values of the differload falls off in a straight line relationship with ent metals may be used to determine relative respect to deflection after the peak has been weldability. 7 passed. The curve of Example 1, Fig. 6 was ob- A performance rating can be established, if detained by determinations made on a low carbon sired, by comparing the ratio of the absorbed steel of 30,000 p. s. 1. yield point and 60,000 1). s. i. energy to the value obtained under selected test tensile, welded and tested at 70 F., this being conditions for a suitable reference material. For taken as standard. example, a mild steel of specific tensile proper- If only a partial tear occurs, the load-defiectionties, welded and tested at. 70 F., may be such a curve will depart from the straight line shown in reference. The rating may be expressed in a perdot and dash, as indicated in Example 2, Fig. 7. centage, decimal, or fractional form. Th energy The total angle of bend corresponding to this absorption method thus provides one single simple point of departure is obtainable from angle-dequantitative criterion from which all opinion has flection curves (see Fig. 13), the angle of deflecbeen removed. The T-bend test is sensitive to tion, or the angle of bend, being the common variations in welding processes, procedures and standard; thus, the maximum load the sample techniques, to variations in strength and cleanliwill resist and the angle of bend are the values ness of the material, and to surface conditions upon which reliance customarily is placed. Fig. and the heat treatment of the material or of the 13 is included for this reason, the view showing a joints, and to chemistry of materials tested, but set of suchcurves for one test condition. without the use of the energy diagrams to obtain A complete tearing failure results in the load a quantitative indication of the influence of these falling off rapidly as shown in Example 3, Fig. 8. factors, the full benefit of the T-bend test is not If a sharp fracture takes place, the load immesecured. Satisfactory correlation has been estabdiately falls to zero as shown in Examples 4, 5 lished between the relative performance of steels and 6, Fig. 9. The energy absorbed then depends of different compositions, properties, and thickon the deflection and load which had obtained up 5 nesses in the T-bend test with the same steels to the time of failure. This failure may take under impact loading in full-scale welded strucplace after the peak load has been passed, as in tures. I Example 4, at the peak load, as in Example 5, or The energy method of comparison takes cogit may occur before reaching the normal peak nizance of the. greater strength of higher tensile load which the material would hav been capable 53 materials. This is very desirable because a of sustaining had it had sufficient ductility-after stronger material, while possibly incapable of dewelding, as in Example 6. fleeting quite as far. as a softer one, still may be The results obtained from the determinations" sufliciently strong to absorb the energy of an on Examples 4, 5 and 6, are shown in the followapplied blow or local service overload without ing table: (J1? failure, and if the stronger material isalso capa- Table I Angle Load at Angle at Relative. gg its, i g g rsr at? T... as... first, g lbs. capigity, capizgrty, I Inch-lbs. 6=100%) 54 4,300 Abrupt-complete. 10, 000 83 54 6,250 54 do 5,400 41 is 5,000 i6 -do 1,200 9 It will be seen that the energy diagrams rovide a permanent visual record of the performance of the welded specimen and that by an inspection of ble of enduring great deflection an energy absorption greater than that of a softer steel will be obtained. An illustration of this i givenin.

Example 10, Fig. 10, the table-below showing the actual data. On the other hand, with a very soft 'and weak but ductile material, ratios of'energy absorbed less than 100 will be obtained. An illustration of this condition is shown in Example 7,

, Fig. 10. For very brittle materials, either strong orweak, the ratios of energy will be low, a fact,

which makes the present improved method par ticularly useful in the designing of dynamic structures. The-data for Examples and '7 of Fig. 10 are'shouminTable II below.

The energy diagrams provide the only known way of distinguishing between the venergy required to start a crack (area in Fig. 7 under the or initial failure or at the completion of bending,

.i. e.,at complete failure, or jig capacity.

It can be seen from the superimposed actual example in Fig. 10, that it is possible to have materials resisting the same maximum loads and having the same deflection at maximum loads and yet have quite different energy absorptions. It will be seen, therefore, that the use of the angle good criterion for Weldability.

j Table IIbelow shows the data for these examof bend at the time of maximum load is not a Once a material is selected as the. basisv for reference, the rating of any other material, on a percentage basis is'obtained from the following relationship: (1) X 100 Where A= actual absorbed energy of specimen being,

tested. B=energy absorbed by reference material.

, R=relative rating on a basis of 100 per cent being the value of the reference material.

When the rating a is equal to the angle or bend (F) at start of failure, the following relationship exists from Equation 1:

A R F ITTOTFT'O or I (3) ='(=132' when Example 1 is the reference F 100 material) The ratio of A/F is the average number of inch- 7 pounds required per degree of bending and therefore, it is only when the material tested has about per cent higher strength compared to that of the reference material that the angle of bend at the start of failure can be equal to the weldability ples. rating.

- Table 11 Load at Angle at i Angle Relative i Max. failure failure Energy Exlal gple i d, 2 5 or jig c or jig; Type of failure abstlilrbed, gg g 1 i a ac b5 deg. 1%;? 2 F1g.6=100%) 66 '1, 900 129 None 0,: 9, 0 74 06 3. 300 107 Abrupt-complete... 7, 700 58 66 4, 300 66 ".1110 4, 600 35' 5e 4, 000 129 None 19,400 147 6, 200 107 Abrupt completehn 15, 300 110 1 50 8,400 r 56 '.do 7,200 7 I v 1 Referring to Fig. 11, it will be seen therefrom that materials having equal maximum loads can The data for Examples 10 to 14 inclusive, Fig. 11 are given in the following table,

Table III 0 Load at Anglo at T 4 7 Example Max 3%;; failure failure Energy igg NO lillg, loadv e ca;01: 001% Type of failure absorbed, (Example 1 deg i 3 1; [1110171 F1g.6=100%) 56 4,000 129 N0ne 1 Q 19,400 "147' 56 6, 200 107 Abrupt-complete". 15, 300 116 v 56 8,400 56 d 7,200 55. 41 ,400 41 5,200. I :39 10 8,400 10 1, 200 8 have wiclelyidiiferent ductility and energy abfsorbing capacities and therefore the use of the maximum load,by itself,. is not a good criterion for weldability.

From Examples 11, 12, 13. and 14 of Fig. 11, it will be seen that the angle of bend at the start of failure isalmost the same as the relative rating based upon energy absorption of a medium in Fig; 6, and from this it might be inferred that of relative energy absorption. The relative rating strength highly ductile material, such as is shown From Fig. '12 it Will be seen that materials may designers choice of which materials to use must number obtained from the absorbed ene gy de'- V. pends uponboth thestrength and ductility of the tested and reference material after welding.

be based upon other requirements of the specific application involved; The steel of Example 7 may be preferable for some applications and the steel of Example 17 for others' None of the other weldability criteria which arejavailable are nearly as satisfactory as this one measurement, that'is,

the'energy absorbed. r

The data for Examples 7, 15, 16 and 17 of Fig. 12 are given below in Table IV:

Table IV 1.0 be applied to beadwelded plating and to other joints ofvarious proportions and shapes. For

Exam Max. gg g i' i l r ya ilil r Energy g gglgve t t t eas (Ema, s. capaci y caper-, me

lbs. deg, F1g.6100%) equal, the material tested has about greater plastic strength than the reference material. To compare two materials of unequal properties on the basis of requiring equal angles of bend alone, therefore, is to ignore the ability of the stronger material to absorb a greater amount of energy up to the point of failure. In many cases this ability may prevent an actual failure from occurring. However, when the stronger material is very brittle, the energy rating system will also adequately provide a low rating to that material. For instance, the high strength material shown in Example 14, Fig. 11 properly received a very low rating. From these comparisons it can be seen that, except for those special applications wherein extreme abilities to deform while still retaining full fluid or gas tightness of the Welded seams are required, the angle of bend at the start of failure is not by itself an adequate criterion for weldability.

5 will be seen from Table V below that even Very brittle materials (Example 14) may have a high energy absorption per degree of deformation sustained and therefore such'a criterion is not proposed for use. Values for all of th illustrated diagrams are summarized in Table V below:

testing bead welded plates the centering slot of the crosshead i9 is not applicable, but all other details of testing are identical. The only necessary requirement is that the bottom of the crosshead must contact the upper surface of the bend specimen at some point before load is applied. Each type of specimen or eachdifierent set of proportions requires its own basis for comparison, butithe method of determining energy of deformation is not changed.

I claim:

1. Apparatus for determining the weldability of metals, which comprises, in combination, a frame adapted to be attached to a platen of a testing machine operating in compression, a crosshead slidably mounted in the frame and adapted to move verticall in the frame under deforming pressures exerted on a Welded specimen of metal received in the crosshead, means on the crosshead for receiving a portion of the welded specimen and for centering the specimen relative to the frame, spaced-apart deforming instrumentalities rigidly but removably mounted in the frame and adapted to be engaged by the specimen, a deforming mandrel mounted on an opposing platen of the testing machine and adapted to engage the welded specimen intermediate the said spaced-apart deforming instrumentalities and to deform the said specimen by forcing the specimen between the deforming instrumentalities responsively to compressional movement between the platens, the said means on the crosshead being positioned relative to the mandrel and deforming instrumentalities so that the deformin load is invariably applied on the center line of the welded Table V Energy Relative absorbed Angle of Rating 3325 Strength Max. load to point of bend at based absorbed Example (refer Figs. 6 to 12) of base resisted, failure start of upon met 1 lbs. or ig failure, energy degree of a capacity, degrees absorbed bending ln.- s.

1 Mediunn. 5, 600 13, 200 l 129 1 100 102 2 d0 6, 650 12, 100 108 92 112 3 Med-high 7, 150 6, 500 49 118 4 Medium 6, 250 10, 900 105 83 104 5 -d 6, 250 5, 400 54 41 100 6. MeL-low- 5, 000 l, 200 9 75 7. LOW 4, 300 9, 800 l 129 74 76 8- d 4, 300 7, 700 107 58 72 9 do 4, 300 4, 600 35 10 High" 8, 400 19, 400 1 129 147 150 11 do 8, 400 15, 300 107 116 143 12 do 8, 400 7, 56 55 128 13 do 8,400 5, 41 39 127 14.. -.do 8,400 1,200 10 8 120 1 5 Medium. 6, 600 9, 800 90 74 109 16 High 8, 500 9, 800 69 74 142 Very high 10, 600 9, 800 59 74 166 1 None. 2 Base.

All of the above discussion has related to the application of .the improved method to welded T- joint bend specimens. The method, however, can

joint of the specimen, and a scale secured to the crosshead and extending horizontally therefrom, the said sca e e n g aduated i to values corre- 1 11 spending to the amounts of deforming forces applied to the specimen, the said cross head and scale being vertically movable responsively to dement being an indication of the amount of deflection of the specimen under deformation thereof, whereby the said deforming forces may be manually plotted against deflection,thereby producing an energy-absorption curve corresponding to amounts of energy absorbed by the specimen during deformation thereof until ultimate deformation of the specimen is reached, the said ultimate deformation occurring under application of increasing forces or under application of decreasingforces following application of a peak load,

depending upon yield point properties of the specimenbeingtested.

l 2. Apparatus foridetermining the weldability of metals, which comprises, in combination, a frame adapted to be attached to a platen of a testing machine operating in compression, a cro sshead slidably mounted in the said frame and adapted to I move vertically in the said frame under deforming formation] of the saidspecimen, the said movepressures exerted on a welded specimen of metal 7' received in the said crosshead, spaced-apart de-' forming instrumentalities rigidly but removably mounted in the frame and adapted to be engaged ;by the specimen, means for applying deforming forces against the said specimen, means for indicating amountsof-thesaid forces, a scale secured to the said crosshead and extending horizontally therefrom, the said scale being graduated into values corresponding to the amounts-of deforming forces applied to the specimen, the said crosshead and scale being vertically movable responsively to deformation of the said specimen,

the said movement being an indication of the amount of deflection of the specimen under deformation thereof, and a. chart support located in a plane parallel to movement of the scale; and adjacent to thesaid scale, whereby the said deforming forces may be manually plotted against deflection during deformation of the specimen, thereby, producing an energy-absorption curve icorresponding to amounts of energy absorbed by 3 the specimen during deformation, thereof until ultimate deformation of the specimen is reached JULIUS HEUSCHKEL. 

